Excuse me? If you know anything about science, you will know that the kind of “science” revealed in the East Anglia e-mails isn’t science at all — not by a long shot. In chem lab, back in high school and college, we were taught to treat experimental results religiously. Repeatedly, our teachers enjoined us to record results directly in our lab books, right there in the lab, and not just scribble them down and then copy them out neatly later, because there was always a slight possibility of miscopying them. In short, respect — reverence, even — for the raw results of experiments, and thus for the scientific method itself, was drilled into our heads. Scrupulosity was paramount. The truth was all. To come from that kind of a background, which is the foundation of all true scientific inquiry, and to read about the shabby, fast-and-loose shenanigans exposed in the East Anglia documents is — even for someone who has long been a dyed-in-the-wool cynic about these things — to be filled with shock and contempt.

Of course, everything here in Copenhagen seems to be proceeding as planned. The show must go on. All over town, the message being trumpeted is the same one reiterated in Sunday’s Times: that the science of this stuff is all settled, period, and that all that remains is to act. Indeed it’s being trumpeted so loudly and ubiquitously that Copenhagen, on second thought, doesn’t feel so much like the Vatican as it does, say, Havana or Pyongyang. Stroll around awhile and you’ll keep encountering giant banners or posters or displays designed to ensure that the great unwashed don’t lose sight of the orthodoxy to which they’re expected to pay mindless obeisance. On the side of one church, for example, a banner three stories high proclaims that it’s “TIME FOR CLIMATE JUSTICE.” There are also endless outsized placards — inspired, I suspect, by Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric – bearing the unfortunate coinage “HOPENHAGEN.” Barfsville. I don’t remember where, if anyplace, I’ve ever seen so many huge, fancy banners. Not to mention the big, splashy, World’s Fair-style displays — among them a giant globe in City Hall Park — which certainly must be using up plenty of electricity. Wasting resources is OK, it seems, when you’re engaged in a noble struggle against wasting resources.

Is it a stretch, by the way, to drag Pyongyang into this? I don’t think so. You know that famous picture of Earth at night, which shows the civilized countries ablaze with light while North Korea is pitch dark? That darkness, after all, is what these characters are proposing for all of us, and for our posterity: international agreements that would create a brave new world in which we’d sit in our feebly lit little bathrooms using one miserable square of Soviet Union-style toilet paper per visit while thinking about all the places we might be traveling to if we still had the right to fly airplanes. Meanwhile these climate kings, these would-be Masters of the Universe (and I can only hope Tom Wolfe is planning to write a novel about them at this very moment), exempt from their own draconian edicts, would continue to jet around the world on private Gulfstreams, attending one pointless conference like this one after another.

One word about Copenhagen in December: brrrr. You wouldn’t necessarily consider it the ideal place to try to put over the message that the planet’s heating up. (There’s a reason why there are songs about April in Paris, autumn in New York, and Memphis in June, but not Copenhagen in December.) Of all people, moreover, you’d think Scandinavians would welcome toastier temperatures. But no – they’re more hyped up about global warming than anybody else. Why? One reason is that they, more than the rest of us, tend to take whatever the UN says on faith. Another is that this spare-a-square mentality brings out the thin-lipped, absurdly self-denying Lutheran killjoy preacher in all of them (think of the bishop stepfather in Fanny and Alexander) and taps into their latent guilt over being well-off and over embracing American-type lifestyles that are alien to their grandparents’ simpler, purer, more frugal ways. Who’s been using up all the toilet paper? Who left this light on? It’s like an oven in here! Talk about a red-blooded Scandinavian’s idea of a good (i.e., virtuous) time! Alas and alack, the Danes, like the Norwegians I live among, are cursed by the so-called Jante Law — a deep-seated mentality, instilled from infancy, which teaches them to feel unworthy of just about anything, to feel guilty about even the most modest pleasure or luxury, and to pour money into charities even if they know the money will end up paying for some Third World dictator’s eighteenth limo. The Jante Law is utterly at odds with the American belief in an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and it’s a natural foundation for the endless riot of petty, humorless guilt-tripping that is a key element of the global-warming cult.

Which is not to deny that this guilt-tripping has taken strong root in the U.S., too. For heaven’s sake, when somebody like Oprah (and I saw this just a couple of weeks ago) actually stands there on her show urging us, with a straight face, to use fewer paper towels in the kitchen, we should break down in helpless laughter at the idea that this woman who owns several lavish houses and travels by private jet should dare to lecture us so arrogantly. Just the other day, Mark Steyn noted that Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the UN Star Chamber for global warming), who has called for “hefty aviation taxes … to deter people from flying,” himself flew at least 443,000 miles on alleged IPCC business during a recent 19-month period. No one with any sense is really surprised by such things — only by the fact that these people continue to be taken seriously. To my mind, the incomparable level of hypocrisy on the part of all the major players in this operation, from Al Gore on down, was always enough to make it obvious that the whole thing was a scam — a scam perpetrated by a cultural, media, and academic elite on people whom they considered their inferiors, and a scam entirely at odds with the premises of American democracy. Of course there was no hard proof. Climategate has provided it.

And yet, as I say, people are still buying it. So it is that while wandering around downtown Copenhagen I come to a square called Nytorv in which I encounter a life-size polar bear made out of ice and provided courtesy of the WWF and Panasonic. It’s a big draw. Everybody’s taking pictures. The idea is that over the course of the climate conference the bear will gradually melt, like Frosty the Snowman, thus making a dramatic statement about global warming. Unfortunately, it’s freezing cold here. (Then again, I have no doubt that they’ve got this thing rigged to melt, no matter what the air temperature.) From Nytorv it’s on to City Hall Square, where twenty or so kids are pedaling away at stationary bicycles that have been set up in a semicircle facing a big Christmas tree — the idea being that the kids’ cycling is powering the twinkling lights of the tree. A couple of dozen other kids are eagerly waiting to take their places. I’ve got to admit, it’s a brilliant idea to get us all off the grid: restore child labor!

And so, eventually, back to my hotel — where in the elevator I find myself face to face with a notice telling me that it belongs to “the world’s first CO2-neutral hotel chain.” Another notice invites hotel guests to participate in an event on December 12, when, at 7 p.m., the entire city of Copenhagen will turn off its lights for an hour — “Earth Hour.” “Turn off the lights in your room and come down to the lounge,” the sign implores. “We’ll serve you a CO2-neutral beer in the candlelight.” It actually sounds cozy: who doesn’t like a beer in a candlelit bar? But in the name of all that’s holy, is this really our future: an endless series of inane, empty gestures posturing as meaningful action on behalf of a legitimate cause — perhaps coupled, if the Climate Mafia gets its way, with worldwide legislation that uses its con as an excuse to obliterate, for all but a privileged few, what in America are known as constitutional liberties?

115 Comments, 115 Threads

Bruce, amid all these displays of faith, do you detect the faintest whiff of doubt? Any sense that this is the Ballet of Chestnuts, the eve of before an awful Reformation that will bring the unholy excess to an end?

These marxist eco-warriors in Copenhagen are also primarily the ones who are enabling Iran to go nuclear making the use of nuclear weapons ever more likely. A nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel could put so much dust in the atmosphere as to bring on a global nuclear winter. I’ll have to remember to try to appreciate the irony right before I freeze to death.

I believe that AGW is, maybe, possibly true, but the actual effect is too far down in the “noise” of normal climate variation to matter, I also think that energy source diversity, and conservation are a good thing. However, I do not like the hypocrisy argument to counter AGW. I mean whining about Al Gore and Oprah…really!! Who gives a flying crap about them? Lets talk about the real science, politics, and conspiracy. These people do not deserve the attention you give them. Al Gore is an idiot. Now James Hansen, he’s supposed to be a scientist. He SHOULD BE scrutinized. In fact I think he should be asked to step down.

Ahhh…it’s settled then. Bruce has convinced me to eschew experts. When next I need a colonoscopy I’m gonna find me an Islamization scholar to do it. Car breaks down? Forget the mechanic, it’s a cultural critic that’ll repair it. Spending years and years learning the computer codes, getting the PhD, learning the statistics – it’s all hogwash. I’m gonna read the newspaper horoscope to help me decide about global warming, the economy, medical science, safer cars, safer airplanes, and don’t even get me started on that whole moonlanding boondoggle. That’s just religious fervor. Thank you Bruce for scraping the scales from my eyes.

“There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now… The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it… The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be COOLING DOWN.”

When Newsweek published this back in 1975, some scientists were so alarmed by the cooling trend as to suggest covering the polar ice caps with soot so they’d absorb more heat and melt… Yet today, global warmers engage in a quasi-religious crusade to spread their gospel. Those who do not agree with their beliefs are labeled “deniers,” as if disagreement, even for valid reasons, is worthy of disdain. Science is about openly debating theories, not squelching dissent.

Warmers declare there is a consensus among most scientists regarding their tenets. Yet I also remember back in 2002 there was a consensus among most Western intelligence agencies that Iraq had WMDs as well… Do we have scientific consensus, or do we have groupthink? How much of this scientific consensus is affected by the likelihood of obtaining further research grants?

We can certainly make changes to improve our overall energy efficiency, resource use, or lower our carbon emissions in a cost-effective manner. Warmers, with their predictions of impending doom, assert that much more than this must be done. But while they argue we cannot afford to do less than they ask, most of the world would argue we cannot afford to do much more. Converting to alternate fuels (other than nuclear) and carbon-reducing technologies would inevitably raise electricity/fuel costs, ultimately raising the price of any item that requires transport -including food. Consider the devastating effects of last year’s jump in oil prices: As the price of oil doubled, our economy choked, food prices rose, and the poor suffered immeasurably. The rising costs associated with “going green” in an already depressed economic state will make many of us ask if “global conservation” is something being done FOR us, or TO us… So forgive me for thinking twice about considering proposals that could precipitate our national or personal economic suicides, to avert the warmers’ unproven predictions.

Cost, of course, is of little concern to the affluent liberal elites, who would likely carry on their lavish, carbon-emitting lifestyles – appropriately carbon offsetted, of course. Carbon offsettings are like modern day indulgence payments, allowing Gore and friends to continue leading their lives of carbon sin without burning in global warming hell.

Ultimately, I don’t discount the possibility of global warming, but there is still much that lies unanswered. I’m skeptical of predictions of impending devastation, or the need to ask for major changes from the world’s population which will undoubtedly raise the cost of living to a level many in the third world will not be able to pay for, all in the name of a “possible” hypothesis. The warmers may insist, making a statement such as, “The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality,” never fully realizing the irony that this is exactly the phrase used to end the 1975 Newsweek “Global Cooling” article…

The interesting part here is that AGW simultaneously ignores other areas of science.

Its a known fact that the planet has been both warmer and colder prior to the Industrial Revolution. It is also known fact that CO2 has been extremely high in the past, it is what lead to the evolution of Nature’s own CO2 scrubbers, plants. It also ignores the information we’ve learned about the big ball of fire up in the sky and its effects upon our environment.

The other funny part is that “humans will destroy the planet’s capability to support life” mantra they keep chanting. Short of global nuclear war we cannot destroy the planet’s capability to support life, that just giving us WAY too much credit at our current level of advancement. The Earth has seen devastating upheavals, from the eruptions of the Yellowstone super volcano to asteroid impacts. These events have involved mass extinctions, yet here we are with all our current bio-diversity and thousands upon thousands of species. We might “off” ourselves and many other species but the Earth and life will go on with or without Humans.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be responsible with our environment or pursue renewable energy (how about more nuclear power), that just makes sense. Fossil fuels are limited, quite frankly the sooner we get off the oil teat the better, and polluting our environment to the point where we can no longer drink the water or go outside without wearing protective suits is bad for our survival as a species.

The conventioneers could exercise their commitment to carbon neutrality by holding their breath for an hour while attending one of the apocalyptic rallies. This gesture of extreme devotion would surely earn them a prized place in the CO2 free Gaian afterlife.

Kabooskibum@8: Yes and let us never let the facts confuse the issue!
rrbs@5: Well, you don’t get it. The warming that we experienced is part of the natural cycle that apparently ended nearly 30 years ago. It’s now cooling. The warmists like to conflate the need for cleaning up after ourselves with the need to control every aspect of your life. Don’t be confused.

AGW is nature’s answer to one of its successful species’ population’s need for more arable land for food.

I subscribed to Sci. American throughout the 60′s and 70′s. It diverted my attention from the Woodstockians who promised to take over universtities, governments, corporations and publishing. I’m sorry to hear that they too have fallen to the huns. How pitiable.

A side note: you assume that the scientific method (remember Bacon?)is taught in the PC/MC miasma spread by our media throughout the world.

Oh another one I like from the AGW folks is when they point out things like wildfires occurring simultaneously, the supposed increased strength and frequency of hurricanes, and other weather phenomenon.

They seem to forget that until about 50 years ago we didn’t have TV, satellites, etc. and news took a while to reach people and Climatology didn’t really exist as a science. 100 years ago we might not know about events occurring on the other side of the world for months, years even if the place was out of the way. About 400 years ago we didn’t even know Australia existed, let alone what happened in its interior. 500-600 years ago we didn’t know about North and South America (there is some debate as to actual “discovery”) or suffice to say there was not regular traffic between Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas.

We are barely a “blip” in Earth’s existence, and the last 50 years is a sliver in Human existence.

How many private airplanes and limousines did it take to get these hypocrites to this conference? That should give you a hint as to how they feel about your carbon footprints and their carbon footprints. If this wasn’t so serious it would be funny. These people are plotting to destroy all industrial nations on this planet. Lies and more lies is all we ever get.

Copenhagen is a Forum for AGWologists, the religion of Gaia and Green Party Communists. The purpose of the Copenhagen Mass Meeting is to codify the religious dogma and produce a long-term, pass-the-collection-plate methodology for extorting the productive nations of the world.

The recent message that the Earth travels around the Sun is not going to interfere with the faithful genuflecting to the Hoaxster Scientific Priesthood of AGW.

9. Durham:it’s all hogwash. I’m gonna read the newspaper horoscope to help me decide about global warming, the economy, medical science, safer cars, safer airplanes, and don’t even get me started on that whole moonlanding boondoggle. That’s just religious fervor. Thank you Bruce for scraping the scales from my eyes.

Durham,
if you found out your doctor cheated on his medical exams would you still go to him for your colonoscopy ? Your AGW experts have proven to be a fraud and no longer qualify as experts.
It is you that has become a believer with no factual basis for your belief. It must really hurt to realize that you are nothing but a useful idiot. It is of course difficult to realize your worldview is based on a fraud and that you have spent the last 10 years believing in a lie but give it time, you’ll soon realize your mistake.

“it’s all hogwash. I’m gonna read the newspaper horoscope to help me decide about global warming, the economy, medical science, safer cars, safer airplanes, and don’t even get me started on that whole moonlanding boondoggle. That’s just religious fervor. Thank you Bruce for scraping the scales from my eyes.”

Durham@9: Fortunately, there are real scientists who will, hopefully with these revelations, begin to finally shove these so-called “climate scientists” back in the box with the alchemists and astrologists. Your vitriol is misplaced and aimed at the wrong folks. There’s fraud and religious fervor alright and you’ve apparently bought right into it. In time, you’re going to feel really foolish about that post.

There’s a new article that purports that global warming is pushing Philippine women into prostitution (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/177346/climate-change-pushes-poor-women-to-prostitution-dangerous-work ) – despite the fact that the article itself mentions massive population growth as the primary reason for Phillippine resource depletion and need for riskier jobs. Oh well, we’ll just add it to the master list. Then again, the list already includes “brothels struggle.” But given all the contradictory assertions already present, I guess there’s no real conflict anyway!

The real point here is, whatever your complaint may be, just blame it on global warming!!

The non-humorous irony of the Climate Change conference, as well as the rest of American domestic agenda seems to be putting science, freedom, and capitalism under Sharia Law. That is law by religious edict and consensus. In almost a moment of sympathy for the Jihadists, the elites in attendance to our future fortunes and libertys would be first on the Jihadist “to do” list. Both the alarmist and Jihadists thrive on what they can get away with to enforce what they believe it, killing us to save us from imaginary damnation.

Good thing those attending this conference are concerned about “global warming” and green house gas emmisions . . . otherwise, there might be more than the 1,200 limos being used, not to mention 140 private jets . . .

AND Dear Leader is going there TWICE in one week on Air Force One . . . (pluse entourage, of course.)

I believe the so-called scientists thesis is completely wrong with their minuscule 160 years study. For the Earth, 160 years is the equivilant of maybe a few minutes of a day within the year for us; if they were serious, they would look farther than 160 years to 16,000 years as a beginning. Then they would look farther back to 16 million years ago for climate. The 160 year mark is in itself a joke. No real data can be gained to look at the overall weather patterns from only 160 years. None. It’s too small a scope.

As a mentioned once before, the Earth once had a higher oxygen content which resulted in the creation of the first insects & arachnids; plants also grew in abundance due to the high oxygen content. This time period as pre-dates the dinosaurs for millions of years as lizards just appeared from their amphibian ancestors. The higher oxygen content made the Earth far more volatile for fires & live volcanoes.

That’s what all the ‘select the best tree’ evidence does.. they’re deliberately chosen to mask the medieval Warm Period, so that today’s temps will look like a new and drastic increase.. whereas the truth is we’re not NEARLY as warm as we were in the year 900 AD…

The point of the ‘nature trick’ was to arbitrarily attach ‘real thermometer’ data (which was also manipulated, of course) to the ‘proxy extracted temp data’ which tree rings, ice cores, etc, produce… if they STOP the proxy data around 1960 and begin with real measurements (concealing, of course, that this is what they’re doing), it goes hockey stick on us. But if they run their OWN proxy formulae against the REAL THERMOMETER DATA, there it is, the ‘decline’ they’re talking about.. the decline is in their own proxy temps, proving they’re using bad formulae to create a disappearance of the MWP to make today’s temps scarier. their proxy math is BAD and it is DELIBERATELY bad. the last thousand years of temperatures, as the ‘scientists’ quote them, are NOT REAL and NOT ACCURATE.

In the emails, we find that the guy Briffa who did the tree rings studies in siberia has ‘gotten himself into a bit of a mess’… the scientists are well aware that proxy studies, paralleled with real thermometer temps, DECLINE rather than increase, and they are conspiring to conceal this.

Faith, not reason, is the motivation. Far too often we’ve heard, “We are backed by science, we have the science….”
My question to these assertions has always been, “Really? Do you? Or have you simply been told that you have it and therefore it must be true because that’s what your religion dictates?”
How many of the adherents to this ideology actually understand the science? 1% ? Maybe 2% ?

So the faithful are willing to accept the infallibility of the Magisterium?

I’m aware of that Dave, I was more referring to things like TLC, History Channel, and other “scientific” or “learning” outlets that will air or publish information that will basically show that AGW is wrong if you actually watch/read/listen and then air or publish some piece on AGW.

Its like if they present the data as something unrelated to refuting AGW its allowed to pass the filters, but if it tries to refute AGW it never makes it through.

Copenhagen is the dream come true of the INTERNATIONALISTS.
The present administration is a CHIMERA of communists, jihadists, America-haters, black-supremacists, but Copenhagen is the SUPER-CHIMERA of America-haters, third-worldists, luddites, totalitarians, dirigistes, neo-commies.
The subversive dream to stop the capitalistic take-off of the whole planet has come near to be realized like never before.
The tree of nihilism produces, after two centuries, its fully ripe fruit:obscurantist absolutism.

So far, 36 comments on this article. I’ve read them all. And nobody has mentioned the REAL reason for climate change. It seems to me that everybody has forgotten that Estes Kefauver from Tennessee told us in the fifties that because of the tremendous shock caused by nuclear explosions, the axis of the world would shift slightly from its God-established angle over time. Remember? It is a slow development and we are witnessing the progress. The shift may now be complete. It is time for you who have travelled to Copenhagen to go home. It is out of your hands.

Delcy, the Earth has withstood super-volcanic eruptions from the Jurassic to Cretacious period, several ice ages, & millions of meteors have hit the Earth over billions of years, yet the Earth is still here. A nuclear explosion is nothing compared to a volcano or meteor to strike the Earth. They are playing on your fears, nothing more. The Earth goes through cooling & warming phases. Otherwise, we would have never had any ice ages or warming periods at all.

The EPA is still insisting the CO2 thing & it must somehow be controlled by a useless government bureaucracy in taxing oxygen & other energy; they are just as corrupt as the exposed e-mails. They have to go one way or another.

It is wrong to characterize the green movement as just that fellow travelers who always hated capitalism and had nowhere to go after the fall of the Soviet empire. That overlooks the fact that there are trillions of dollars at stake. And, the opportunities for theft, dishonesty and corruption are so very great that even folks at the UN and DNC are drooling.

Could one of the conservative foundations devoting its money to fighting lesbians please devote some cash to editing a film showing the hypocrisy–the limos, the jets, the hotels–and stick it on you tube? Titled “The inalienable right to the 20 minute shower,” it could feature the “hide the decline” email. It’d be a great prequel to a new movie. “Gored.” Please…I have no such ability…but others do.

Indeed. We should record and preserve the zeitgeist of this time in Copenhagen in as accurate and engagingly shared a manner as we can devise. Some thirty or forty years in the future, we can look back on this time and leave our children the record of the foily of the early years of this millenium.

If we don’t make a record of this, they won’t believe that it was so. The other side will have their lies at the ready to say that it never happened this way. If we did not have the films of Riefenstahl, would we believe the stories we hear of those times? Would we see the look in those eyes?

True, but don’t forget that Lenin had been taken through Germany during WW I (by a German train) in the hope he would help Germany to defeat Russia. He did in fact, but the real result has been a triumph of totalitarianism.
Today greed is certainly behind the climate scam, but the result will go way beyond what the vultures hope to earn.

This could be their last pilgrimage.
They remind me of the hippies traveling to woodstock. Get drunk, high and free sex.
Obama vented when car execs flew jets to washington and now they are doing exactly that in Copenhagen.

These decisions made in Copenhagen are vital to the strength of our planet’s future. As for email’s, I am sure we have all sent a few over the years that we may have regretted. And what is wrong with driving to the summit. They can’t walk. And finally, even if it does nothing else than to help stop the western transfer of wealth to the middle east then in many people’s eyes..its job done !! The working people win for once. Don’t you agree?

Wow Bruce just explained the reason for IKEA”s existence, think of the furniture, bland, uncomfortable, unadorned, utilitarian, kind of like a 1960′s Soviet apartment building. Now I get it, amazing that in reading the following IKEA immediately came to mind.
Another is that this spare-a-square mentality brings out the thin-lipped, absurdly self-denying Lutheran killjoy preacher in all of them (think of the bishop stepfather in Fanny and Alexander) and taps into their latent guilt over being well-off and over embracing American-type lifestyles that are alien to their grandparents’ simpler, purer, more frugal ways. Who’s been using up all the toilet paper? Who left this light on? It’s like an oven in here! Talk about a red-blooded Scandinavian’s idea of a good (i.e., virtuous) time! Alas and alack, the Danes, like the Norwegians I live among, are cursed by the so-called Jante Law — a deep-seated mentality, instilled from infancy, which teaches them to feel unworthy of just about anything, to feel guilty about even the most modest pleasure or luxury, and to pour money into charities even if they know the money will end up paying for some Third World dictator’s eighteenth limo. The Jante Law is utterly at odds with the American belief in an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and it’s a natural foundation for the endless riot of petty, humorless guilt-tripping that is a key element of the global-warming cult.
They can have it, I’ll work my but off to enjoy the gorgeous overstuffed comfy couch, my gourmet kitchen with 6 burner stove (just for making my massive Christmas eve dinners) my 40ft trawler yacht, etc.. etc..
Now back to my Restoration Hardware /Pottery Barn catalogue.

We Climate Vindicated — whose scorn and derision directed at those who created the lies and fraud at the base of the mass-hysteria aroused by the false prophets of the global-warmmunists’ godless religion led to that gang calling us “skeptics” — have been validated.

We always maintained that the pseudo “scientists,” their Socialist-International-supporting politician-enablers and their lock-stepping Goebbelsesque propagandist/pamphleteer “press” pals, who promoted “scientific” consensus as if it was actual science, were frauds and that their loudly proclaimed “consensus” both disqualified their claims of representing “science” and marked them as politicians. What they always were and still are is simply one of the heads on the many-headed hydra of totalitarian tyranny. One that emerged from the neck of the head called “the military-industrial-complex” when that head (particularly in Southern California and Texas) was chopped off consequential to the Greatest One’s defeat of the Evil Empire and winning of the Cold war.

And now the actual “Literature,” made available by an East Anglia whistle-blower, validates our so-called “skepticism” — and the doubts the godless religion’s false prophets have long called “denial.”

And now that the Nile’s but a river and is back in Egypt? — Go plait it, Warm-mongers.

Brian Richard Allen
Lost Angels – Californicated 90028
And the Very Far Abroad

” … the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research … (and) a government contract (has become) a substitute for intellectual (integrity). For every old blackboard there are now (millions of computers).

“The … domination of the nation’s ‘scientists’ by federal … allocations, and the power of money … (has absolutely corrupted ‘science’).

“Yet, in holding ‘scientific research’ and ‘discovery’ in respect, as we (once could), we must also be alert to the … danger that public policy (has) become the captive of a (pseudo)-scientific-technological elite.”

No worries folks. When Islam takes over Europe, many millions of Native Europeans will be dead and a good chunk of the worlds industrial infrastructure base will be destroyed. Thus the world will be saved.

Nice to see Gordon Brow getting pilloried in British Blogs today after speaking of his determination to cut emission (raise taxes) and save the planet. Did he really think we had all forgotten that only a few months ago hid wretched government of hypocrites was desperately trying to fast track the expansion of Heathrow Airport, saying it was necessary for the economic development of South East England.

No, we want you to pay attention to experts: physicists, geologists, mathematicians, statisticians- rather than the climate “scientists” who know nothing of any of thiose fields, but blunder amateurishly around in them.

I’ll take the guys at CERN over charlatans like Mann any day… and you should too.

you know why MSM and politicians are saying that c-gate isn’t a big deal, that this is the way science is done in the real world?

Don’cha remember these people in chemistry class in high school? That WAS the way they did the science… they made stuff up, waited for you to do the work for them, or just appropriated your work. THAT’S why it is no big deal to them, they don’t know from hard science anyway.

Environmentalism is a religion. The Copenhagen nonsense reveals how destructively dogmatic religions are. To think, we have trouble understanding the mindlessly dogmatic agenda of Islam. Islam is no different in its approach than Environmentalism. This is why our Constitution tried to prevent the State from establishing a religion. CO2, my ass. Here we are, at the crossroad to the complete destruction of the open society. The plan for the pathway is already in place. We are turning down this road no matter what. The time to vote these morons out of our government was 2008 and we didn’t. These people have enough ignorance to call themselves progressives. What is progressive about going back to totalitarianism? Sheesh, what a mess.

The Luther in your analogy, is IMHO the insider who leaked out the zip file which contained all the bits that they really didn’t want the Ignorant Masses to see.

And a major point of the Reformation was to be able to read the Bible in English, not intermediated via a fabulously venal, corrupt and wealthy priesthood. The current Priesthood is of course them as What Knows Best for Us All. And the InterWeb is doing Tyndale’s work, in making the raw data available to the assembled brainpower of millions.

But let’s not forget that the real Reformation went through a long and bloody sequence:
1517 – Luther’s 95 theses
1530′s – Henry VIII realises that if he himself heads up the Church in England (rather than the Bishop of Rome), he gets a twofer: his next wife Plus the wealth of all the English monasteries. What’s a poor King to do?
1535-6 – Cromwell’s Commissioners sweep away the monasteries. Goneburger.
1547 – Edward continues the dissolution of the old faith, but dies in 1553 – Chance rolls the dice.
1553-8 – Bloody Mary re-Catholicises England, and even on her deathbed signs the warrants for two more in a long line of Protestant barbecues.
1558-1603 – Elizabeth I rules, and the religious madness subsides.

We will see a compressed version of this sort of sequence: my bet is that we’re around 1530 now: the realisation seeping in that there will be considerable advantages in replacing the corrupt Establishment.

But we await our Two Thomases (Cromwell and Cranmer) to lead the charge….

Mr. Bruce Bawer: I am a libral and not too sure about this whole climate BS.. I rememeber back in 80′s they started another BS that we were running out of landfills and nothing happened… However my question for you is this:

this site is used by mulim and black hatings people such as yourself.. I know that you are gay.. so they don’t hate you because you are a right wing gay? I am assuming so… they would hate a liberal gay!!! what if a guy is gay, black and a muslim, can you imagine that?!! look you drag queen: if it was not for us liberals and people loving ACLU you still would be screwing your partner in the closet!!!!! that could be hot though!!!

Yes a religion allright
“we must all cut down to save the planet”
Like Christian self-flagellation at Easter,
or Orwell’s Animal Farm book, where mass hysteria meant one pig
overtrumping another in self-sacrificial willingness
- except here it’s always someone else (not the politicians) who has
to make the sacrifice….

Actually,
it doesn’t matter at this time whether CO2 emissions need to be
reduced or not – it can be achieved anyway from proper policies

Changes in electricity and transport (80% of CO2 emissions) should be
done anyway,
for very different advantages,
including electricity bills that are lowered from opening up
electricity grids to competition,
and smart meters can be set to automatically give the cheapest (and/or
greenest) electricity at any time,
which might also be powering some cars
ceolas.net/#di1x

The simple focus on the largely local electricity and transport sectors,http://ceolas.net/#cc1x
avoids expensive meaningless emission trading (cap and trade) with its
loopholes,
avoids international tension arising out of trade with less regulated countries,
avoids alienating people by telling them what Light Bulbs or TV sets
they can or cannot use,
and easily meets 2020/2030 emission targets.

In 2020/2030 – if CO2 reduction is still seen as warranted – other
industries can be involved.

Well, I’m not sure about that. These things are just too much fun for them. It’s like Woodstock for dweebs.

P.J. O’Rourke attended the environmentalist circus in Rio back in the ’90′s. It was the same thing, a lefty religious gathering, where Castro was treated like a hero (’cause we know he’s been really effective at lowering the carbon footprint of Cubans.)

At least Rio was warm and featured the Brazilian beach ladies and their postage stamp sized bikinis (well, it was a plus for the male attendees anyway. I’ll bet Brazilian beach dudes probably aren’t too hard on the eyes either.) In Copenhagen, all the warmists are bundled up in coats. But, hey, at least the Danish hookers are giving away sex!

About that time I was attending the meeting
of the L5 Society at which the Pros took
over from the Foolish Founder.
The FF stood there on the podium, looking
at the Takeover Crew, and asked:
“Why are you _doing_ this ?”.

A: Because we like being in control, and
getting paid to bring the Society’s stance
in line with the mainsteam NASA worshippers.

67. Bear @ Behemond:
Physics students get no points,
unless they show their work.

The point of Peer Review by Certificated Experts
is, again, control; Only those anointed by TPTB
may preach to the faithful.

What a pity the International Police Force called INTERPOL couldn’t turn up in Fraudhagen and arrest all 16 thousand fraudsters red-handed (pun intended)and cart them off to a far distance Gulag for re-education spanning 20 years, the same time that they have all been lieing to the rest of us.
Here in Australia we slammed down an idiot attempt to tax the nation into the Stone Age by the bunch of Maxists presently in power, led by
a carbon(pun intended)copy of Kim Il Sung, known here as ‘the dear leader’.

Sir, the records show that Dr.Pachuari flew the globe in order to participate in Cricket matches. This seems to me to be a totally laudable purpose. Indeed I feel that international air travel for that purpose should be subsidised for the moral good of mankind. But only for that purpose- there is none other.

Durham:
You have reached VIVO levels of cluelessness. You did build a nice strawman though. NOBODY has attacked science, nor did this article attack the scientific process. It attacks climatologists, which as a group have proven themselves to not be scientists.
You have a basic misunderstand of just what science is. Let me help you with that;http://www.sciencebuddies.org/mentoring/project_scientific_method.shtml

To be a scientist, one MUST earn ones paycheck by using the scientific method to advance the frontiers of human knowledge. Once in a while, you prove a theory, at which point he engineers take over and design a marketable thingie based on your work.
There are those that think anyone with a PhD in a certain field is a scientist. That is wrong.
Most science is done by people working on an advanced degree as lab assistants. BS. Or MS. Since there are limited funds for research, after getting a PhD, most go into another field to earn their paychecks. Administration, the bureaucracy, politics, academia or the media. The guy that runs Hadley CRU, the one that just got fired, is NOT a scientist, he is an administrator. Of the hundreds that work there, most are bureaucrats. There might be a dozen or so scientists, maybe. A surprising number of them turn out to be data entry clerks with PhD’s.
The thing you missed about the CRU data base heist and dump is that the peer review process was corrupted. That makes it invalid.

The real deal about climategate is the data and the model algorithms.
The E-mails are evidence of a conspiracy, which will eventually land those “scientists” in court and maybe Jail, but they have little direct impact on the AGW debate. The data and the models will allow a true peer review by real scientists.
Meanwhile as a warming ‘truther’, please explain how humans are causing global warming on Mars? I’m looking forward to that. When you finish your ‘splainin, you can go on to how humans caused global warming 1 (one) million years ago, when they have only been around for 100,000 years.

If the politicians in Copenhagen cared about working people they would have teleconferenced and spent the money saved on unemployment payments. Their primary interest is in increasing their own power and wealth.

Let’s face it. Cheaters cheat on lots of things. But the global alarming sky-is-falling pukes are a special breed.
For this is high stakes cheating. It’s all about money. Billions in government grants and such.

But what makes them so reprehensible is the fact they’ve put a cloud over all government/university data from soup to nuts.
How now do we decide who to believe? For this breed of pseudo scientists have jumped the believability shark for
their entire generation.

And no amount of damage control perpetrated on people by the alphabet broadcast networks can put the genie back into the
bottle. The truth is a powerful thing. And it’s out.

Brian Williams screamed on his propaganda machine tonight that the fix-the-planet clock has hit zero. I deduce the other stations,
CBS and NBC,nnnnnnnnnnnnnnhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhik tonight discredited themselves as well in much the same way. The talking points were these: If we don’t get substantive
agreements in Copenhagen, we’re doomed. If it reminds you of the urgency pre stimulus; “we’ve got to do this now”, I’m not surprised
because liars and cheaters have been boys yelling wolf since January 20th. And I could argue well before.

Our job now is to throw out the bums who try to scare and lie like rugs to you. Ordinarily, I’d say we have to wait for the
traditional processes to start ridding ourselves of these hateful has beens who specialize in savaging the truth. Who use their degrees to
disseminate a sky high degree of deception. And secure ill gotten monetary gain by the billions in the process.

But Rachel no longer can wait. I, we, insist that these purveyors of deceit resign and not let the door hit them on the way out.
Either that, or Americans may come into your offices, grab you by the scruff of the neck, and throw you out. I know your knee jerk
reaction will be to call the police, but come a date certain, our own exit strategy for you goes into effect. Federal enforcement authorities, and this should scare you to the bottom of your lying feet, are on a date certain, answerable only to the people. Not government liars and cheaters, but to the people.

I implore President Obama to not go to Copenhagen; not lend the honesty and integrity of the office of President to this Copenhagen travesty to reclaim the good name of the lying global alarmist geeks. President Obama, should you go, please inform the world that you won’t be a party to scientists, who, through, lies and deception, cook the global warming books. Treat these evil people as radioactive, Barack. You can put us back
on the right climate track. The honest, genuine, truthful track.

The stakes are high. The contemptible evil doers have been caught red-handed; have been shown to be full of hot air.

The truth clock has clicked to zero. The cook book scientists are nothing short of criminals. I could argue they’re domestic terrorists. If you want to put them under U.S. criminal law, then read them their Miranda rights. Place them in a holding cell. Let them call their lawyers.

The higher frequency of forest fires is directly related to an increase of population in areas that should not be habitable. Its hard to complain about a forest fire in an area that has always been very dry. On the point of hurricanes, storms are being named before they are even hurricanes. The media also demonizes hurricanes, when it is well known in the south that we count on tropical storms and hurricanes for well needed rain during the hot summers. This summer was the quietest storm season I can ever remember.

John Birther
Everything you said: wrong. But most telling is people who condescendingly try to tell others what the scientific method is. Once you attempt that, I know you’ve never done science and know not which you speak of. Scientists around the world are nodding their heads at the complexity of trying to explain this, the nutjobs are telling us how it’s all a vast conspiracy.
However Bawer is simply shameful. He protests the sneering snobbery of the scientists, while opening with a religious metaphor of the most sneering snobby prose. Hypocrite. And appallingly off target – religious fervor describes the raving community of climate skeptics, it does not describe the scientists.How could he manage to get the 400 year old tension between science and religion so wrong? Maybe he learned it in that high school chemistry class that made him a better scientist than the blokes at CRU.

“But Rachel no longer can wait. I, we, insist that these purveyors of deceit resign and not let the door hit them on the way out.
Either that, or Americans may come into your offices, grab you by the scruff of the neck, and throw you out. I know your knee jerk reaction will be to call the police, but come a date certain, our own exit strategy for you goes into effect. Federal enforcement authorities, and this should scare you to the bottom of your lying feet, are on a date certain, answerable only to the people. Not government liars and cheaters, but to the people.”

First, let me applaud you referring to yourself in third person. Narcissists around the world salute you. Second, I look forward to seeing your true self on TV as they haul you off in cuffs after you, they, storm the offices on Capitol Hill.

By the way, what exactly is a “federal enforcement authority?” It’s not that kid down the street with the primered black Camaro is it? The one on probation for syphoning gas? Wait, I got it, it’s conservative wonderer and misteranthropicus dressed up in cammo and berets and carrying a backpack full of dehydrated water, Wheat Thins, and a couple back issues of Hustler. Stunning! I’m sure they’ll be trained and ready to heed your call.

First the vague ambiguous “cause” now followed up by a vague and ambiguous “date certain.” Now THAT is what I call leadership. “I can’t tell you what we’re doing or when we’re doing it, but trust me, it’ll be huge.” You sound like Charles Whitman. No doubt you’ll find the tallest tower in Washington and launch your revolution from there. It’s got good optics. Well done.

# 84 Durham tried reading what you said to get its message but all I got is a load of ad hominem HOT AIR and not one significant argument at all. Please try harder its not good enough just to be supercilious you have to SHOW us your intellect and your argument. So far you have shown us nothing at all just soem High School name calling.

61: Bohemond: Interesting vid. I’m halfway through it now, and thank you for posting the link.

62: D: Alas, that’s what I remember from my high school days, too. I was the one (math/physics major in college)actually recording my lab results in science classes, while the future poly-sci majors were retrofitting theirs. Not to mention documenting unknowns and sources of error.

I found the comment “But most telling is people who condescendingly try to tell others what the scientific method is. Once you attempt that, I know you’ve never done science and know not which you speak of” a rather puzzling one.

As I’m someone who actually teaches science for a living, and who has “done science” before (I’ve put my PhD on hold to take care of my aging father), I find myself having to explain to students what the scientific method is rather often.

Perhaps the commenter meant the word “condescendingly” to be a key part of the description of what separates those who’ve done science from those who haven’t done. But many of us science geeks can be condescending (as I’m being now to that commenter), so “condescendingly try[ing] to tell others what the scientific method is” doesn’t show that someone has never done science.

How can it be that trying to explain the scientific method (condescendingly or otherwise) is a marker for having never done science? Surely the only way for the scientific method to persist is for those who do science to pass it along to the next generation.

The Obama administration, and their supporters, whether it´s EPA, Junk Scientists at CRU/UEA, PSU, NASA/GISS et al, and their sycophant followers lacks rational thought, i.e. can´t distinguish between what is real, or not, or if their theory, the AGW theory, if it can be proven, or not, and its anti-human, and anti-capitalism consequences, therefore:

I should correct myself: “Not to mention documenting unknowns and sources of error” is a sentence fragment and unclear. The poly-sci types were the ones who didn’t bother doing these things thoroughly, while we science types racked our brains trying to figure out what in our experiment was still unknown or could be a source of error.

Durham
So tell, o great one, on how to do science properly ? Explain to me then the reasons why the raw data was destroyed? Give me one good reason why there is no open peer review where all the data, the scientific process and especially the findings were critique not only by climatologists, but also to be read and critique by outsiders of that particular community like physicists , chemists, geology and others who have no financial or personal stake on the matter. In fact, will the theory of AGW stand if there is no politics involved and no financial incentives are involved in matter?

Durham you dufus, some of the blokes at CRU, including its (former) director Phil Jones have been caught faking and fudging the data to fit their religous-political worldview of AGW alarmism and shore up their reputations and careers. It’s called ClimateGate, get a clue.

Many of those AGW skeptics you dismiss as religiously motivated are in fact scientists, very prestigious scientists included whose expertise pertains to climate science. You don’t know who they are nor what they are saying. Clueless. You have it the wrong way round when it comes to who is being motivated by religious zeal.

A theologian friend likened the events taking place in C’hagen as the eco-marxist equivalent of the council of Nicaea, except the Holy Trinity isn’t up for debate – there simply is no rigorous debate of any kind. I think the closer parallel is to that of the haj pilgrimage to Mecca. They have even built a Kaaba-esque like structure there too, but no news as yet of how many times they must encircle or kiss it. I guess for now they just look at it and weep and feel immense guilt for exhaling CO2, while the apostles of Al Gore plan to systematically tax them to death in a conference center down the road. Any chance we can rig the display on their eco-Kaaba to show arrivals and departures of all attendees visiting the conference?

#84 Durham; “Scientists around the world are nodding their heads at the complexity of trying to explain this, the nutjobs are telling us how it’s all a vast conspiracy.”==================
Yes, climate science is complex. However, one does not simplify a complex subject by fudging the data. Those who do so are frauds. And those who do so for money are whores.

Yet, I do have one smidgen of disagreement; the crack about sounding like Chuck Whitman. See, Chuck was barely literate, (more or less in the O.J. category), never, ever talked about himself in person number three. Oh, yeah, one other thing. Chuck missed a bunch of shots. I fired expert (highest military ranking). I rarely miss.

Of course, that’s with an M-14. My most accurate weapon is the old, bolt action, scoped ’03 that holds a clip of just three rounds. I rarely get to shoot the Nazi P-38 my Uncle gave me. Incidentally, it’s one, if not the biggest cause of ED in wood-be rapists.

Incidentally II. Since my friend and I have started shooting ourselves for the youtube “I’m embarrassed having voted for Obama” videos, my days hanging around PJM are pretty much numbered. So if you want to stay in contact, you’ve gotta go to youtube. Or email me.

On youtube, we’ll be talking to independents in a much more, golly, gee whizz tone. CF Bleachers can make sure the folks here stay pointed in the right. He’s the best. And I’m gonna suggest that one of the papers around Chicago let him do a column. He’s that good.

The other thing you ridiculed a bit was the scruff of the neck stuff I wrote about getting rid of the stiffs who’ve made a science the cheating and deceit that birthed climategate. And you scoffed at my suggestion there was a time and date when the federales would turn. Only Obama is dumb enough to give important dates to the enemy. The mere suggestion, though, is effective.

As you know, the liberals traditionally don’t trust police in any form. I read in some paper yesterday that somebody outed some kind of hair brained idea that Obama’s guards should be required to take some kind of loyalty
pledge. An insane idea, but not unexpected because there’s always the fear that any kind of law enforcement is ready to turn on you like a wild tiger you’ve cared for since birth. Anyway, that’s the base of my references, often implied, that
there are military or police ready to read liberals the riot act. Janet Napolitano took my bait not too long ago if you remember. And was roundly
rebuked for distrusting our returning military.

Your note to me was well thought out and nicely structured. No typos. Something I have trouble achieving for some reason or another. Take care.

A tidbit.

Tiger, on Ambien, intentionally created the demolition derby outside his driveway. The equivalent of throwing a club, which Tiger is
known for. There’s a lot of sports writers who were aware of Tiger’s dalliances and kept them quiet. A little you rub my back I’ll rub yours going on. Like all the drinking Mickey, Billy and Whitey did that everybody knew about but nobody wrote about. Even Bouton left it out of “ball 4.” And was rewarded with “Big League Chew.”
Rachel

Off to YouTube with you then. I’m sure you’ll find distinction among the 10 hours of video that is uploaded to YouTube every minute. But why do you feel compelled to misrepresent yourselves as having voted for Obama? Must everything you do be based on false pretense? That’s equivalent to the transparent nom de pajamas around here who start off with, “I was a lifelong Democrat, but now . . . ” No truth there. You should try living from a place of principle and integrity. It’s a lot easier to manage. By the way, thanks for listing your gubs. It makes me feel safe. They’re kind of candyass, but you gotta start somewhere. So, go with god . . . try to work out that gender identity issue, and don’t syphon any more gas.

The youtube grand opening is still a couple of months away. So I’ll still be around for awhile.

Who are you? You should get paid for writing. Are you at PJM because it’s easy to comment here? I’m here because I had to take early retirement. That’s why I have the time to do this. I hope you realize that two and a half percent of the people here would be aware that when they argue about the second amendment, they’re talking about gubs.

By the way, funniest Woody scene I ever saw was in “Zelig” where Hitler’s giving a speech and Woody Allen is one of the Nazi soldiers sitting behind him. Woody sees his girlfriend in the audience and waves at her, trying to get her attention as Adolph continues to give his speech.

Rachel is a character I created who was effective speaking from the point of view of a conservative college girl. She’s actually one of the feral kittens I raised. There’s her sister, Phoebe, brother Joey, and we even took in the very feral mom, Mrs. Peepers. After working in Chicago for 30 years, we all moved to the country in central Illinois.

101. rp:
Ah, central Illinois. The muggy dust of New Salem. The riverfront in Beardstown. The bass of Lake Taylorville. The Old State Capitol in Springfield. Endless fields of corn and beans. The tar-striped bumps of I 55. Cozy Dog! The gambling boat in Peoria. God’s country.

Mr Bawer’s article describes the Copenhagen conference as a cultural phenomenon — It’s satire (or clear-sighted reportage of an event that’s inherently self-satirizing, depending on how you look at it). It makes no claim that CO_2 is not a greenhouse gas.

If you’ve studied any earth science, or if you’re just scientifically literate, you know that greenhouse gases are necessary for the planet to sustain life as we know it. Most people here think that there’s still honest debate to be had about whether we humans are making enough extra greenhouse gases to destructively affect the planet, and if so, what, practically, can we do about it. Will the costs of trying to curb our emissions outweigh the benefits? This doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me.

I, too, *wish* that we could cut our dependency on fossil fuels and pollute less, but I’ve also learned that we have to be careful what we wish for. Often, our good intentions have not-so-good consequences, and what actually helps our environment isn’t always clear. People, by and large, aren’t disagreeing that helping the environment is a “good thing”; rather, they’re disagreeing about whether an event like the Copenhagen conference actually helps.

Candles may look more “carbon-neutral” than lightbulbs, but if candles give off more C0_2 per lumen than lightbulbs (which I think they do), are they really more “carbon-neutral” than lightbulbs?

If you live in a desert, is it more environmentally-friendly to raise your baby in cloth diapers or disposable diapers? Disposable diapers are thought of as environmentally “bad”, but especially when you’re in a desert, don’t you have to consider all the water it takes to wash cloth diapers?

If you decide it’s not environmentally-friendly to raise a baby at all (but you still want to have sex) and you use hormonal contraception, how do you approach the fact that the metabolites of such contraceptives in waste-water can deform fish? If you have surgery to ensure that you won’t make environmentally-destructive baby while having sex, do you feel guilty about the phenomenal amount of waste that modern sterile surgery generates?

If the amount of petrochemicals and energy that goes into running a car on a biofuel for a mile is greater than the amount of petrochemicals and energy that goes into running a car on gasoline (and some, but not all, studies estimate that it is), how have we become more energy-efficient or less dependent of fossil products by using that biofuel?

Returning to Copenhagen: There’s evidence that once economies reach a certain level of prosperity, increasing prosperity helps the environment while decreasing prosperity harms it. The model is an environmental Kuznets curve. Personally, I think it’s a promising model, though it’s still being tested, and some experts disagree with it. A lot of people worry that the fallout from Copenhagen will be economically destructive. Kuznets-curvers worry that the fallout from Copenhagen may actually *damage* the environment more than it helps. Think about it. Wouldn’t it be dishonest to not even consider the possibility that that may happen?

As for “bizarre insults” — there’s nothing creative or entertaining about ordinary insults, so if you take the trouble to insult someone, you might as well do it in an unusual manner.

Mr. Bawer, a delightful article. Thank you. I love your take on all that is happening in Copenhagen this week.

Please remember to stay off the streets on December 12 at 8:00, as “Earth Hour” will be immediately followed by “Put Out All the Fires Started by the Misuse of Candles Hour”. If you enjoyed your beer by candlelight, I’m sure you’ll love a glass of wine by the glow of a major city burning to the ground because too many people gave up the safety associated with modern lighting and heating technology. I assure you this event will NOT be carbon neutral.